*rollonthesummer* 's Broadchurch Series 3 thread, PART 2

[ThaliaLuxurySpa]

(Hope ok with you, rollon, to continue thread on your behalf?).

part 1 Broadchurch series 3 here

Let's go onwards with our intriguing or madcap theories, people...

The most unbelievable part of Broadchurch is how everyone seems to expect Mark to just get over losing his son. Really? When his murderer is walking around free as well?

That is so true Graphista. I've not been raped but I've been coerced into sex at some point by every man I've been with. I've had my bra strap pinged, boobs fondled, bum smacked/groped by men during my teens and twenties and even by my own husband. After 16 years, he finally apologised the other week as he's finally starting to realise what women (me) have put up with over the years. His eyes are definitely opening - my boobs are not 'his boobs', they are MY boobs.

TinklyLittleLaugh I think that's one of the reasons I felt it so important to have them in the story as it did portray that people cope in different ways. I felt desperately, desperately sorry for both of them and I completely understand why he's not able to move on. I think I'd be consumed with the awfulness of it every minute of every day. But I also really felt for Beth when she was having her rant at the vicar about Mark sucking everything out of her. Again, I've not been through anything so horrendous but I can see why she was rebuilding her life better - she still had two girls to be strong for and was better at finding a way to put one foot in front of the other.

Late to the wrap-up.

I am not shocked. On the one hand, yes, sad that Michael was groomed. On the other, he was already starting down - if not this actual path, a bad one. Look at the role model he has for a father. And his mother? Not victim blaming, but she/their dynamic is a classic example of why you should not stick together "for the sake of the children". So, he grew up thinking treating women like shit is OK.

And, sorry, but I didn't see a lot of censure for this in the wider community. He distributes porn at school and gets one detention?!? The school didn't do a deep forensic on his phone, call in the police? He and his mates are so warped that they'll distribute coerced pictures of a girl they know, then have the fucking temerity to go round to her Dad-the-scary-policeman's house and give him lip?

I honestly felt for him when he was told by Leo to rape Trish - he had to have known that "having sex" with a woman who was bound, gagged and unconscious because she'd been hit on the head a with a cricket bat was not "right" or Ok. But his background left him with not a lot of foundation to make the right choices.

All that said, it was still his choice, bottom line.

I think this series should be required watching for PGCE.

And, yeah, i also don't like that Trish says OK to Ian's takeaway - in addition to the wider message, I don't even think it's true to form that somebody feeling so violated would be ok with a violator in her life. Or that there's no visible fallout for Ed's stalkiness, or Jim's blatant infidelity.

Like PPs, I'm disappointed that the focus had been in "invited guests", when clearly there were crashers - did nobody think to mention them to the police back in ep.1?!? And when first questioned, Trish was (understandably) unable to identify the face, but there is so much more to describing a person, the general size, shape, agility and - ffs! - heft of a man who's on top of you. There's no way this slip of a teenage boy could have been, say, ex-husband Ian, or beefy Burnett or short-arse Aaron. Ok, maybe she couldn't remember, but we didn't hear the police questioning even going there.

Sad to see it over, though.

That's the point that struck me. Michael Lucas was a slight lad in comparison to the other men being questioned. Surely Trish would have noticed that. Unless - was she unconscious for the whole thing? But I thought she said she came round during it. I guess she would hve been disorientated and terrified though.

What I loved at the end was how the showed Ellie and Beth as strong, independent, single mums after dealing with all the heartache they have been through they remained friends, both had great jobs and raising their children

My question - why were Michael and Lucas walking back from the party when they had apparently arrived by car?
The portrayal of Beth as rape counsellor did annoy me. The way last night she stood with the police facing Trish when they gave the news just felt wrong. She's Trish's counsellor, not police liaison.

I was a bit disappointed in the ending. Especially when Trish agreed to Creepy Perv Ex coming over for a takeaway. I'd have preferred Beth and Mark getting back together to seeing Trish let him back in to her life.

Yes why did Clive need to give them a lift home when we'd seen Leo and Michael getting the rape kit out of the back of his car earlier?

Too much time was spent on the scene with Beth and Mark. I'd have liked a more succinct "yes I still love you but you were unfaithful plus now have attempted suicide which has fucked me off given the fact you have two surviving daughters so get yourself sorted out and maybe we'll have a chance". Or something like that.

Disappointed there was no wrapping up of Jim and Kath's situation. Ditto why Ians girlfriend had sent that text to Trish and where he'd been living since she kicked him out. Or even why Ian and Trish had split up in the first place? Or maybe I missed those bits.

And I didn't realise the vicar was leaving either.

Mark was unfaithful? When and with whom?

In series 1 with an Australian woman who ran the hotel. He was with her on the night Danny died.

In the first series. Part of his guilt was that he was shagging OW in the car park on the night Danny was killed

Although I'm not sure if they actually had sex?

Ah right. Well that puts a somewhat different complexion on things.

Cross post Cag.

Presumably they were too drunk to drive home. Know Leo had no moral compass but did not want to get caught drink-driving

I think part of the problem with the ending, is that we knew next to nothing about Leo and Michael. There were just too many characters and loose ends for there to be a satisfactory resolution. Reference was made in the first episode to the fact that Leo didn't get on with his father, but there was really no other explanation for his behaviour. The throw away line that he was an aberration detracted from the piece. If they had ended with a scene of Hardy talking about how there were still good men in this world ,it would feel far more satisfactory. Also I didn't think a lot of Trish being attacked moments after her ex husband had been lecturing her on her promiscuity. That was a unnecessary juxtaposition.

I disagree that Michael's involvement was implausible. We saw that Lucas was controlling and emotionally abusive of both Michael and his mum. We also saw him hit Michael and I think we can infer that he may have hit his wife too. Michael was very vulnerable to the grooming of an older, intelligent, wealthy psychopath like Leo.

I didn't think that Leo's confession was implausible (although the phone full of rape footage maybe was). He had been waiting / expecting to be caught for years and basically said that he was surprised it hadn't happened sooner.

What I did like was that it showed that rape is all about control, not about sex.

I agree with the PP who said that they felt this was a trilogy. My favourite part of the ending was the demonstration that Ellie and Beth had finally repaired their friendship. I didn't agree with the theories that Mark or the vicar were involved in the rapes when they were posited. Their purpose in the drama was to show the long-term effects of Danny's murder.

It wasn't a bad ending. I had been thrown off-scent by that actor saying that it was going to be someone from the first series, and also I think we're so used to having a really big, surprise twist that we (or rather I) didn't think it would be one of the people already in the frame. I think it was actually possible from the clues to work out that it was either Leo or Michael, though probably not that it was both.

I'd already worked out (see my comment on page 5 of this thread!) that it was probably going to be someone young because of the vodka and the football sock. I realised that the summer timing was significant, though hadn't clocked that Leo had been to uni and would come back for summer holidays.

Oddly, in the very first episode when they interviewed Leo I thought "It's him", partly because he was so unpleasant and cocky and partly because he didn't look like how you imagine a rapist to look and therefore, in the logic of crime series, that would naturally make him more likely to be one. But after that initial thought I allowed myself to be distracted by other lines of enquiry - and also when he made his girlfriend give him a false alibi I thought it made him too obvious. Ha!

Anyway, all that aside, it was incredibly unpleasant, wasn't it? And quite upsetting - which is probably as it should be. Loose ends - I still don't know why taxi driver had the keyrings etc. I don't think that was explained. I thought it a shame that Trish seemed to be reconciled to Ian even though he'd installed spyware on her computer. Generally, despite what DI Hardy said to Miller, all the men were super creepy.

All in all, a pretty good series, except I do think eight episodes was too long. We didn't need all that stuff with Mark and Beth, or the small subplot with the editor, but I can see why they did it - they wanted to create a sense of community and they wanted the continuity with the earlier series. It was very much following the model of the Scandi crime drama like the Killing.

If my ex had installed spyware on my laptop, it would be a cold day in hell before I let him back.

In a sense, I feel the resolution of the story let down all the work they'd been doing to combat rape myths throughout the series - the teenage boy groomed by the not-very-old-himself psychopath is hardly a common scenario. It would have been much more powerful and effective for it to have been a friend's husband, or a colleague, or her ex, to show viewers the horrifyingly mundane reality of what a rapist actually looks like.

Instead it was resolved with this implausible twist which allows people once again to remove themselves and their friends/family/colleagues from the reality of rape.

I was satisfied with the ending, particularly as I predicted after episode four that Lucas' son had been forced to commit the rape and that Leo had filmed it. I did think that Lucas was involved, so I got that bit wrong but other than that I am all ready to change careers and join Wessex Police.

Off to assist AC12 now and unmask Balaclava Man.

This was the first series of Broadchurch I've seen and I have really enjoyed it. I did fear it wouldn't be as good as the hype of the previous series suggested but I was not disappointed.

I did think it was let down, though, by the circumstances of the rape. I asked my DP if it was likely a bloke would have a hard on in that situation (having been drinking and under force) and he didn't really think so. I know pps have said it isn't entirely unlikely, but I'm not convinced.

What I would have loved to have seen was how Clive was before this all started. He was painted as such an evil character but how much was that due to the enormous stress he was under, knowing what his stepson had done? He's not the most faithful of people but he did, apparently, give up his career to support Lindsey when she fell pregnant, so he's not all bad. The fact that he was willing to go down for rape to let Michael go free showed his true character.

I thought it was great. A good, albeit depressing, conclusion. Could've done with half an hour longer just to flesh it out a bit more though, think itv were a bit tight there.

Trish and ex takeaway thing was annoying though, but her face said 'fuck off im foing this for our daughter' though I think.

Rory's sermon was a bit shit, maybe he's just not a very good vicar.

Final scene with millargh and hardy was great, loved the orange coat. Wanted him to say yes to the drink but more realistic and true to form that he didn't though, the miserable git.

Am I the only one who doesn't think Mark is ever coming back?

I saw him as opting out of being a father. Chloe is grown, but Lizzie is only what, two?

Poor child is going to grow up without a Dad cos Mark needs to find himself. Sorry, but I was incensed.

Beth doesn't get to opt out and go off and find herself!

It was very grim viewing.

Church scene was very cheesy. I would have preferred it if Trish's husband hadn't been guilty of anything (maybe if he'd got the spyware but not gone through with using it). As it was, it was unbelievable that she'd be happy for him to come round to her house.

Without OC and DT this wouldn't have been anywhere near as successful.

I saw him as opting out of being a father. Chloe is grown, but Lizzie is only what, two?

No, you're not alone. I thought the same. Where was Beth's 'I don't get the choose' speech?' (Not sure that's the exact quote)